Now that the US armed forces are returned to Panama, great tensions have been reestablished. At the same time, this moment is a painful reminder of Operation Just Cause in 1989, which resulted in the slaughter of thousands of civilian Panama. The political landscape in Panama is undoubtedly tense right now. At least two-thirds of the population opposes President José Raúl Mulino’s management of the situation. The situation has prompted a local lawyer to file a legal case against the president, accusing him of “crimes against the international personality of the state.”
Newly released negotiations documents between the US and Panama have exposed the wide gaps between the stories of each side. The Panamanian government has argued that through negotiations and discussions, the US acknowledged Panama’s “inalienable sovereignty” over the canal. US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has pointedly avoided taking ownership when asked to do so at a recent press conference.
So the new MOU is full of exciting provisions. Additionally, US Navy ships can now be fully reimbursed for fees that they pay while going through the Panama Canal. The agreement stipulates an increase in US military presence at three former bases within Panama, purportedly to “secure the Panama Canal from Chinese influence.”
The Panamanian government insists that this agreement is resistant only and temporary and is therefore not a military base. Now opposition parties and critics are blowing the whistle on the recent…They claim that the deployment of foreign troops in such a setting would, in reality, amount to the establishment of a military installation.
“If you have an installation which is for use of foreign soldiers and they have control over what happens inside – and Panama has to ask in advance to enter – that’s a military base,” – Ricardo Lombana, Panamanian opposition leader.
The lead photo for the MOU featured aerial photographs of Fort Sherman, Rodman Naval Base and Howard Air Force Base. It showed very clearly those areas marked out for training, humanitarian work, and placing US property. As the recent poll indicates, many Panamanians are uncomfortable with this degree of military involvement. They think back to the violent history that American military operations have exported to the region.
On-the-ground local transparency advocates are raising alarms over the lack of detailed public communication from President Mulino on these deals. The local chapter of Transparency International has called on him to disclose all relevant details regarding the negotiations and any pressures he may be facing.
Last week, in early February, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was on the ground in Panama discussing the situation with Mulino. After the meeting, Mulino told us that the discussions were nevertheless “very cordial.” He stressed that he and his government perceive no threat to the canal’s sovereignty.
Despite these reassurances, public sentiment remains strained. Indeed, the discomfort with the US’s return is understandable – particularly for those who lived through the disastrous fallout from America’s past military interventions.
“An invasion without firing a shot, but with a cudgel and threats,” – Ricardo Lombana remarked, reflecting on the current climate.
The Panama Canal neutrality treaty forbids any foreign military presence in the Canal Zone. This is to ensure that the territory is free from all external military interference. Critics say the new agreements would breach this treaty. They point to these moves as a direct danger of fostering a long-lasting foreign military footprint in Panama.
Population fatigue is setting in among the citizenry. It will be up to President Mulino to keep a watchful eye on these increasing pressures and keep his or her people confident that their sovereignty is not threatened as US military engagement rises.